Granted Saddam is a first-rank SOB with a record of cruelty. But unilateral attack on Iraq would be a violation of international law as well as of our own constitution. Despite claims by Bush Jr's chickenhawks, there is no evidence that Saddam or Iraq is linked to al Qaeda or the 9-11 outrage.
By the way, according to Scott Ritter (a former head of the UN inspection team), the purported assassination attempt on Bush Senior has no evidential basis. An urban legend concocted by journalists. On the other hand, despite a Congressional ban on calling for assassinations of foriegn leaders, Bush Jr. has come close by issuing a general authorization to the CIA and Special Forces to capture Hussein, using deadly force if they were in danger. I would expect that to be a dangerous mission indeed.
It would be well to let the new round of inspections proceed without interference. But Bush Jr. has constantly attempted to trivialize or discredit the inspections. The administration claims to have intelligence that Iraq has and is capable of delivering weapons of mass destruction, but so far seems not able or willing to produce enough evidence or leads to direct the inspectors to the right spots. Let there be no mistake - whether biological, chemical, or especially nuclear, there would be immediately recognizable signs of the activity.
The posture of the administration on Iraq sidetracks the fight against terrorism, and alienates people all over the world. Let us bring our policies and practices back in line with our principles and ideals. No unprecedented unilateral attacks!
Linear Mode
